In some jurisdictions (e.g. Germany) "copyright" belongs exclusively to the author/creator and is non-transferrable, the German word for "copyright" (Urheberrecht) also literally translates to "author's right"). So instead of transferring copyright to an entity (e.g. the employer) you only grant an "exclusive, transferrable and unrestricted" license to that entity, essentially prohibiting you from using it without their permission while technically still retaining that right. This is also why CC0 exists as a substitute for a public domain declaration because in these jurisdictions it is literally impossible to transfer your copyright to the public domain.

In Germany copyright law there is actually one provision for the real transfer of copyright: death. So as far as copyright is concerned, the transfer of copyright requires literally death of the author - which might get a chuckle out of people into media studies.

In case you didn't chuckle:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_the_Author

They are called "authorship rights" in Polish. While the right to distribute or make copies doesn't aleways belong to the author they always originate from author. And some are even non transferable or revocable, like the right to say "I, <my chosen name>, made this thing"

Works fine in Dutch law really, you just have to allow for the option that a company can be an author. A work could also have multiple authors.

I prefer it to a name that's more accurate because it signals what the purpose of the law is, which I consider more important than its implementation.

Now that I think of it that also works quite well when naming things in software. Don't name things after their implementation, when you can help it.

I think the equivalent is called author's right in civil law countries